[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Cast your vote for the Fedora 10 Codename!

Tim Jackson wrote:
Josh Boyer wrote (to a bad address copied from a bad address in my original mail):

Just vote 0 for all of them.

If I understand the voting system correctly, that's not equivalent because it means "no opinion" not "none of the above" or "none" [1]. I think under the current system with no quorum that if (hypothetically) everyone except one person wanted "none" and thus voted zero for everything, if one person voted "1" for "Stupidname" then "Stupidname" would win regardless of the clear contrary opinion of the majority.
Just a clarification to this statement, the voting form states:

"Fedora Project has implemented Range Voting for this election, in particular the "Range (score-summing, blanks treated as zero score, no quorum rule)" range voting system.

To cast your vote in this election simply select a value between 0 and 9 with 0 as 'least or no preference' and 9 as 'highest preference'.

At the end of the election, the highest ranking candidate(s) are marked as the winners."

This means:
* There is no need for a 'No Opinion' option
- "No Opinion" options are only useful for elections using 'averaging', where it basically acts as an abstain. An Averaging variation of Range Voting would add all the numerical 'scores' for a candidate, and then divide by number of non-no opinion voters, it'd then have to (from memory) reach a quorum of x% of the maximum possible vote (this is debated because there are SO MANY different variations)...
- As such, use 0 to facilitate a blank ballot/no opinion
* It is possible to fill in the form with all zero's
- However this will have little/no effect, except to say in the end of ballot that x voted with x including yourself (useful in a way to show the number of people interested in voting)
* There is a small mistake in the text
- highest 'ranking' candidate(s) should read highest 'scoring' candidates (this is fixed in my working copy.

As an extra note, the CFRV, while a useful resource is quite bias to a variation of Range Voting which we don't use, it's particularly focused around promoting Range Voting as a decent format for a presidential election (that's my take anyway).

On a side note, there are other forms of voting similar to Range Voting, that form a (in my opinion) much fairer system, one I can think of off the top of my head, is STV, while complicated it does work and is quite effective for single horse and multiple horse races.

- Nigel
Fedora Elections Guru

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]